Elaine Loughlin: International security is something Ireland needs to discuss
Tanaiste Micheal Martin speaking to reporters after the opening session of the Consultative Forum on International Security Policy at UCC on Thursday. Picture: Brian Lawless/PA
What, if anything, did we learn from the first day of the Government's Consultative Forum on International Security Policy?
Protesters who were hauled out by gardaí and accused of trying to shut down the discussion may have been the talking point of the day, but international security is something Ireland needs to discuss.
The many speakers, both from the stage and the floor, raised significant concerns about how exposed Ireland is when it comes to cybersecurity, maritime security, and critical infrastructure.
These threats are far more than theoretical, possible, or even probable — attacks have already been launched.
Tánaiste Micheál Martin said the reality of the new threat to global security was brought home in 2021 with the HSE ransomware attack. He said:
“I can tell you, frontline clinicians couldn’t get access to x-rays during that attack.
"It was a very, very scary time, many senior HSE people became ill working around the clock to deal with it.”
We also now know that the Government wants to become more involved in the Permanent Structured Cooperation (Pesco), especially around cybersecurity and maritime surveillance.
The aim of Pesco is to jointly develop defence capabilities and make them available for EU military operations.
Mr Martin said we should not be "squeamish" about ramping up our involvement in such EU operations.
"I'm absolutely convinced in the world of technology, that sharing information, sharing experience and expertise is the key way that we collectively within Europe can deal with the threats either from ransomware, criminal gangs, or from state actors," he said.
This was echoed by panelist Professor Brigid Laffan, who said there is often a public view that Pesco is “bad”, however, she said the structure has increased the capabilities of our own armed forces so it is "fit for purpose in the 21st century".

But we also know that many do not agree with this approach and there was a divergence of views on the approach that should be taken to foreign policy in the future.






